Something I've been thinking about..

About a year ago, I was messing round with some equity calculations and stumbled across something that might be significant (Or I might have got this completely wrong) anyway:

A hypothetical scenario to illustrate the concept.

You're playing in a 5/10 game, you're in the BB with 45o, it folds round to the SB who is a player you have a perfect read on, you know his tendencies down to the exact combinatorics. He limps, you know he only does this with 9 10 and AK, he either raises of folds every other hand.

the Flop comes 678r and he bets 10 into 10, now you know his exact frequencies here, and that he will bet 9 10 100% of the time and AK X% of the time, which gives you exactly 35% equity against his range (X being whatever % gives you 35% against his overall range).....which is higher than the 33% you need to make a profitable call, so, you call.

The turn comes, it doesn't matter what it is, for the sake of completing the hand, it's a blank 2. Again, he bets pot (30 into 30), his frequencies haven't changed at all (if he bets the flop, he bets the turn and river 100% of the time) so, getting the correct price again, you call.

The river comes, again, it's irrelevant what it is (6s) he bets pot again (90 into 90), you, with 35% equity against his range, call.

I've come to the conclusion that folding the flop (clearly not the best decision from an EV perspective..or is it?) is going to be more profitable than calling 3 streets here. (Maybe my maths is wrong somewhere, and this scenario will never happen but I think is a good example to try to illustrate the concept. However it can (if true) be applied to any other hand)

I think in your situation folding and calling are about the same, but I get your overall point. There are a lot of times in poker where players take into account their immediate flop pot odds but not future betting.

For example let's say to have 55 in the BB in a 6max 5/10 game. Folds to the CO who raises, folds to you, you call. Flop is J84. You check and he bets half pot. Your immediate odds are good here, however if the player is aggressive you may be put into a tough spot later. This is fine if you're decision is to call down on certain run outs or you feel he's a robotic idiot who will never bluff the turn and river.

However lets say the player plays with turn and river frequencies that are somewhat balanced. Lets say on good bluffing river opportunities, your opponent will bet pot 80% with value hands and 20% bluffs. Now it would be a mistake to call, but you are also now losing to some of the hands you were beating on the flop that you thought made the call good. This is one reason why immediate flop odds don't tell the whole story.

Again though, in your example it's NOT better to fold. But in a real poker game, against a player that you only have a vague notion of how they play, it's going to be better to fold early in a small pot when calling on the flop is marginal.

Are you saying he is going to barrel the next two streets after he barrels the flop no matter what?

If that is the case, yes, you should fold the flop. Because your essentially calling $130 into a $10 pot. I could be wrong here but this seems like the case.

Yeah, Even though, in the scenario, you are making three correct calls, overall you will be losing money by making three correct calls. ((270*0.35)-130) = -35.5



You can use this too make more profitable decision on earlier streets by factoring in villains barrelling frequencies later streets. Of course, it isn't as simple as laid out in the scenario, as equity changes on later streets..I made an equity calculator which factored in adjusted equity needed in regards to barrelling frequencies, but I've just realised the calculations are wrong (in the calculator)

[QUOTE=Toadstool;2025556]Yeah, Even though, in the scenario, you are making three correct calls, overall you will be losing money by making three correct calls. ((270*0.35)-130) = -35.5
/QUOTE]

very interesting!!! never thought about this before in a math sense

Not sure how much it applies to a real situation but interesting nonetheless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Are you saying he is going to barrel the next two streets after he barrels the flop no matter what?

If that is the case, yes, you should fold the flop. Because your essentially calling $130 into a $10 pot. I could be wrong here but this seems like the case.

---

I was thinking this same thing. If you KNOW he's going to triple on you no matter what, then you're calling $130 on the flop, and the pot is $10, and you win 35% of the time. But on the flop you are getting 140:130 odds, so need to win 48% of the time.

So what's the lesson here? Don't make marginal EV calls, even if you think you're getting the correct odds vs opponents that are likely/very likely to barrel us?

Within 5min of starting sesh, 3 handed table. featuring donks

***** Hand History for Game 5131801954323 ***** (On Game)
$600.00 USD NL Texas Hold'em - Friday, April 01, 04:04:07 ET 2011
Table Betfair 063 (Real Money)
Seat 10 is the button
Seat 8: chervoney2 ( $961.10 USD )
Seat 9: DrTarrasch ( $1216.00 USD )
Seat 10: OwnYrSoulz ( $720.00 USD )
chervoney2 posts small blind [$3.00 USD].
DrTarrasch posts big blind [$6.00 USD].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to OwnYrSoulz [ 5d 4c ]
OwnYrSoulz raises [$12.00 USD]
chervoney2 calls [$9.00 USD]
DrTarrasch calls [$6.00 USD]
** Dealing Flop ** [ 8c, 7d, 6d ]
chervoney2 bets [$40.00 USD]
DrTarrasch raises [$132.00 USD]
OwnYrSoulz raises [$708.00 USD]
chervoney2 folds
DrTarrasch calls [$576.00 USD]
** Dealing Turn ** [ 9s ]
** Dealing River ** [ Qd ]
DrTarrasch wins $1490.00 USD from main pot
DrTarrasch shows [Ts, 9d ]
OwnYrSoulz shows [5d, 4c ]

lesson, fold 54o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexos

Within 5min of starting sesh, 3 handed table. featuring donks

***** Hand History for Game 5131801954323 ***** (On Game)
$600.00 USD NL Texas Hold'em - Friday, April 01, 04:04:07 ET 2011
Table Betfair 063 (Real Money)
Seat 10 is the button
Seat 8: chervoney2 ( $961.10 USD )
Seat 9: DrTarrasch ( $1216.00 USD )
Seat 10: OwnYrSoulz ( $720.00 USD )
chervoney2 posts small blind [$3.00 USD].
DrTarrasch posts big blind [$6.00 USD].
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to OwnYrSoulz [ 5d 4c ]
OwnYrSoulz raises [$12.00 USD]
chervoney2 calls [$9.00 USD]
DrTarrasch calls [$6.00 USD]
** Dealing Flop ** [ 8c, 7d, 6d ]
chervoney2 bets [$40.00 USD]
DrTarrasch raises [$132.00 USD]
OwnYrSoulz raises [$708.00 USD]
chervoney2 folds
DrTarrasch calls [$576.00 USD]
** Dealing Turn ** [ 9s ]
** Dealing River ** [ Qd ]
DrTarrasch wins $1490.00 USD from main pot
DrTarrasch shows [Ts, 9d ]
OwnYrSoulz shows [5d, 4c ]

lesson, fold 54o

---

haha, read ftr before you play!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toadstool

About a year ago, I was messing round with some equity calculations

---

About a year ago on april fool's day?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toadstool

Yeah, Even though, in the scenario, you are making three correct calls, overall you will be losing money by making three correct calls. ((270*0.35)-130) = -35.5

---

The flop and turn calls are not correct.. future action must be accounted for in EV calculations unless you're all in.

Honestly it's a subject that I understand well, the problem is that it's hard to explain and even harder to quantify. ISF is right though in the laid out hypothetical; you are basically calling 130 into a 10 pot.

hmm i guess i was wrong, makes sense. I still feel like we're missing something here though...

I think this a valid concept that i have been taking into account in Live poker games for the past couple months..( after reading FTR obv) .. I would rather fold on earlier streets with the example N2intheworld mentioned because the games are deep and the barreling frequencies are high ( esp if u show weakness).

However in OP's post I feel that having a perfect read is a bit tougher. First of all 9-10 and AK (or similar hands) are very exact hand ranges, and if this were the case folding is probably better. However, having 78-and similar hands in there raising range on the BTn might skew the equity calculations considerably. Esp since i would expect him to 3brl on these particular run-outs. If that were the case then there were more hands in their value range that we beat while simultaneously having his bluffing range in their as well. That might make calling down better.

Another point to take into account is if he's on a higher level and he knows that u will think that u expect him to have 2nd nut or nut hands in his range while u might have a strong bluff catcher in ur range so he could look polarized (skewed ofr value) to get us to fold out those better hands.

I feel that these decision really depend on a variety of factors and aggregating them into bunches to make playing these tough spots more robotically is probably worse than making the best rational decision u can at that moment. And if his range is wide enough for him to be doing this for a couple of reasons then we just have to chalk it up as a cooler and call it off.

Future action must be considered to determine effective pot odds. How could one win at poker without knowing this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nutsinho

Future action must be considered to determine effective pot odds. How could one win at poker without knowing this?

---

You should of seen things in 2005.

this comes up all the time in limit poker. i forget the exact figure, but i think we need something like 42% or so equity in a 6+ handed 7stud game with decent sized antes to be continuing vs a 3rd street steal with 4 streets to come (assuming we have no implied odds advantage/disadvantage). was surprising to me at first. i mention the limit game concept because future action is much easier to quantify than in no limit games where you can fuck around in position quite a bit...

this concept comes up quite often in nl when we are check/calling in single raised pots from the BB hu or when we are considering calling a raise/barrel line etc etc

Quote:

---

this concept comes up quite often in nl when we are check/calling in single raised pots from the BB hu or when we are considering calling a raise/barrel line etc etc

---

Sorry to bumo this up guys but is that still the case recently? https://imagicon.info/cat/10-3/1.gif